News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Turning Soybeans into Diesel Fuel Is Costing Billions by toomuchtodo on Wednesday January 17, 2018 @12:47PM (#16170020)
Could we not discontinue the legal use of food production for biofuels, pay for those crops to continue to be harvested (readiness payments), and then gave the crops away for free to those in need within the country?
Re:Turning Soybeans into Diesel Fuel Is Costing Billions by lostapathy on Wednesday January 17, 2018 @01:27PM (#16170381)
It doesn't quite just work that way. For example, the corn grown for ethanol production is really no good for people to eat.

edit (too deep to reply): I really don't think it's moving the goal posts, you asked about redirecting that food production in general, not soy. As is mentioned elsewhere, the soy oil isn't really used much for food anyway.

That said - you can't just swap corn grown for ethanol for "corn for people to eat" - the equipment involved to harvest it is completely different, as are the facilities to process it. The same concerns apply to other crops.

Re:Turning Soybeans into Diesel Fuel Is Costing Billions by toomuchtodo on Wednesday January 17, 2018 @01:30PM (#16170414)
We're talking soybeans at the moment. This is moving the goal posts. If you can't eat corn-based ethanol corn, you grow other crops on that land.
Re:Turning Soybeans into Diesel Fuel Is Costing Billions by LeifCarrotson on Wednesday January 17, 2018 @02:41PM (#16171060)
No we could not. That subsidized introduction of available food would shift the whole demand curve.

Farmers currently produce as much food as the market demands, plus some excess capacity is converted biofuels. If the market required less, they would (eventually) produce less unsubsidized food. Then, the logic goes, WW3 takes out a lot of our food and we suffer massive shortages because there is no extra capacity to produce more.